I must agree with you that, like any national should be proud of his (her) nationality, a Chinese should be proud of being Chinese despite all the problems and baggage’s it carries, and that China has the right to develop its naval power. All at the same time China should take up increased responsibilities of the world without infringing the development right of others. The successful 2008 Africa-China Summit, attended by 45 heads of state of Africa held in Beijing being a good example and a good start.

I think your post is among the best on this article. You (and I) may be still some years away from being qualified to teach English (as second language), but your expression is succinct, clear and made from your heart, and that’s all that mattered. Good luck with your study.

"by and large the sino-us relation is not bad, the majority of the two people are rational, I don't see a war between china and america." LesAdieux

I agree with you. With the financial tsunami, and with Obama taking on the Presidency, there is now a new foreign policy for the US. In foreign affairs, Obama's policy looks very focused. As long as a country does not pose terrorist attacks to US, and as long as a country does not pose any threat to its major regional allies, the US will take on a friendly gesture. Firstly, the relation with Cuba and other Latin American countries will improve. Secondly, the relation with some Gulf countries will improve, in particular after troop withdrawal from Iraq (I will even predict the relation with Iran will also improve, and very likely Iran regime will become secular again within a two-term US Presidency, I speculate).

There remains the relation between Russia/US and China/US. I don't think Russia will be a major challenge to US in many strategic matters, though Russia will definitely cause the most tactical headaches to US administrations due to easy clashes in many common areas, in particular in the former Soviet states where internal pro-US, pro-Russia forces will most likely be having tug-of-wars in the years ahead.

China has more internal concerns (both economical and political) to tackle than to divert energy to fuss around with US, though CCP rhetoric might look antagonistic from time to time, but clearly will just be strong national stands for the benefits some of its supportive people (to be proud of and day-dream about a glorious No. 1 China). The ultra-nationalists would of course like China to flex its military muscle in the region, but would unlikely be successful. Unlike Russia's military intervention into former Soviet states that have internal support to the Russians, any military intimidation by China towards its neighbors will be viewed as simply aggression from the outside. The only possible military conflict will be in relation to Taiwan. With this limited area of concern, I believe the US administration has no problem in persuading and preventing any military actions across the Strait.

chirangu wrote:
[These are all 'democracies' with citizens not nearly as nationalistic or racist as (what appears to be) the Chinese norm].

No, chirangu, Chinese are not racist, on the contrary, they are the victims of the racism.

Look at the postings on this website, how many of them from the west really treat China as an equal? They are either demonizing China or bashing the Chinese, casting China as an abnormal entity simply because it is a "Communist" state.

To look at a people and categorize them purely from an ideological angle is in itself a form of racism.

"If China has chosen controlled Capitalism, may be it is good for them and I wish them luck and prosperity" Vineet Joshi

China economic policy is actually more capitalist than many European countries. The issue in contention here is political rather than economical. After setting the platform clear, here is my view:

Did North Korean people choose their form of government? I don't think so. And judging from the wishes as expressed by Chinese in HK and Taiwan plus intellectuals in the Mainland signing the Charter 08, I doubt very much Chinese will choose the current authoritarian regime if given a choice.

PS: China is also very complex with many minorities. The hot-headed nationalists of Mainland China will most likely contend that the more complex a society is, the more reason for it to be gorverned in a non-democratic, authoritarian way.

"Qin, do you know why there are so many Indian posters here? Because they are having so much fun! Due to misguided "national pride" you and Tiger do not want to talk about the negative side of an authoritarian regime like CCP. How can one ever defend an authoritarian regime given the contemporary political culture of the general acceptance of the importance of democracy and "rule-by-common consent"? It is just like as futile as to defend "colonialism" nowadays!"

I've come to realized that its not our fault to be holding a 'national pride' banner all time long but the restless, senseless china-bushing everytime a topic about china. This thread is about navy, why you and your friends from India try to say something that's very off topic? That's quite silly. What's the navy building in China having something to do with your dear democracy, huh?

"Admit it, HK Chinese choose democracy rather than authoritarianism, that is why there is one-country-two-systems in the first place. Admit it, Chinese in Taiwan choose democracy rather than united with the Mainland under a "more-relaxed-one-country-two-system". Admit it, given a choice, you know that Chinese in HK will choose the Taiwan political system rather than the current one-country-two-systems structure. "

So what? You have the right to choose what you like. But you just can't force others to live the way that you like. China's meritocracy work just fine. Let it be. ;)

By the way, I'm waiting for the perfect form of the democracy at the far end of the horizon. Until then China's political system seems OK to me. Just imagine a few prison breakers in the parliament... that lets me down. ;)

"Our market is 5 times larger than US's, this determines that China will the superpower in the future. India will be No.2, but it will cost more time, cuz of your "democratic" and caste system."

I don`think so because the assumption is based on unlimited resources.But resources are limited! Especially oil and water will be critical. Once the oil price hit 200$ per Barrel (which it will in some years already) China with its resource intensive industry will be hit hard. In 2007 and beginning of 2008 one could already experience what happens when oil prices hit 100$ per barrel and more. India may grow slower but India`s growth is more sustainable. The whole world economy will change but same as with the financial crisis, the resource crisis is often ignored. Only some economist admit all these projections for 2030 or even 2050 are not realistic because there are simply not enough resources on this planet.

For better or worse, as a nation China has not had a very heroic military history. Among the population the PLA is a joke. I've been to many company meetings in China where they do a skit poking fun at the PLA. Most popular Chinese movies with them in it is always a tragedy. Turn on the TV in China at mid-day and you will certainly find just such a tragedy showing.

Further, in history the Chinese spend more time fighting among themselves (PLA versus KMT, Red Guards vs PLA) than anything else. It's a curse that cannot be solved with new and fancy ships. History more often than not repeats itself, and China is one political struggle away from wasting away recent gains.

Also, I appreciate Change_Face's efforts to defend what he sees as misinterpretation of his country and their actions, but it's frustrating to see even balanced comments addressed as attacks. I don't know if it is a factor of writing style, but I hope people realize that their posts can sometimes be combative and force polarization of an issue. Maybe that is the preference of some, but I don't know if makes for the most productive discussion. I appreciate the passion, as the most controversial posts often provide the most insight; I just don't think that they need to be so abrasive a read.

Change_Face:
To follow up on my last post, 3 pages back now, I did not say that China wished war, merely that it's propensity for violence is no more than any other armed country. I do not believe it is currently in China's interest to make war; I was voicing my anticipation for the further advancement of the country and the innovation and prosperity it will no doubt bring the world through its ascension. I apologize if it was poorly worded.
As far as military growth being necessary for scientific advancement, that may seem to be the case if you study the current American system. However, I think it is more of a case of where the money is coming from, as the DoD spends large sums of money through DARPA on research. That same government money could just as easily go through the NSF I feel. I think there are other countries that have managed scientific research just fine without it being driven by militarization. Post-war Japan comes to mind, but the military umbrella probably undermines that example. Switzerland maybe?

PS1: It always appalls me when Mainland Chinese folks say, "hey, you don't understand Chinese culture, so you don't understand Chinese mentality, such as Chinese "can't work with western democracy", "China ACTUALLY had religious freedom, and human rights etc". In reality, these same folks don't know ANYTHING about Chinese culture. Only my friend Qin knows something about classical Chinese literature (hmm, I guess panda knows something about poetry too, actually he tried to write English in a poetic way, not totally successful, but nice try and with progress). I find Taoism rather interesting, and would take this opportunity to share one of my previous posts with folks here:

"...a short trip of philosophizing according to Chinese culture, a Taoist interpretation of Big Bang :

道 生 一 ， 一 生 二 ， 二 生 三 ， 三 生 萬 物

Before the Big Bang, there is nothingness, there is Tao. Nothingness means positive elements completely balancing out negative elements. As in quantum mechanics when a particle collides with an anti-particle, BOTH will be annihilated into nothingness; conceptually speaking THAT nothingness actually consists of both a particle and its anti-particle. When ONE is born from Tao, our universe was born and the law of physics took over, and ONE bred TWO, TWO bred THREE ("Three" means a lot in Chinese conceptual system), and THREE bred EVERYTHING."

PS: Ian Johnson, a report of Wall Street Journal won the 2001 Pulitzer Prize on International Reporting on his reports on the suppression and persecution of FLG and its members in China. His reporting from China was also honored in 2001 by the Overseas Press Club and the Society of Professional Journalists. Later in 2004 he also published a book "Wild Grass" on the subject. Needless to say, after that, he was barred from reporting in China. Currently he works from Berlin and is working on a book about the Islamic Center of Munich. Those who are interested in a non-CCP perspective of falun gong can check up the Pulitzer Prize official website for Ian's award winning reports.

I don't think China as ruled by CCP is trying to, or actually can, challenge the military might of US. Its military muscles, even when flexed, certainly has no effect on some of her more aggressive land-neighbors like the Vietnamese who had demonstrated to be able to fight more fiercely than the more well-fed PLA soldiers (who has proved to be more adept at crowd control around Tienanmen Square then, I mean in 1989, and now (plus efficiently setting up numerous road-blocks around Tibet periodically); long gone are the adept PLA fighters against the old KMT and Imperial Japanese army).

One outcome for certain, hot-headed young Chinese nationalists ("bao qing" in Chinese; well-fed and well-spoiled), many around here, will certainly stand more firmly behind one CCP, dreaming of a future "world-militarily-financially-culturally-and "god knows what"" number one. Simple minds and easy pawns.

"One crab is worse than one previous crab" is the state of many young people in the Mainland.

Japan became a military power born out of the samarai culture and Yamato Damashi....the Spirit of Japan....its country is small and mountainous with no natural resources..they feared foreigners calling them KATO ....hairy foreign barabarians. Admiral Perry of the USA sorted them out one morning. General Douglas MacArthur fixed them again later refusing to execute the Emperor...a wise move.
Japan today is in a state of panic as America is no longer their bread basket or dumping market. The high Yen has ended that cosy trading relationship.
CHINA is not a beligerent country by nature. The Chinese like America for more reasons than just trade. The Chinese have never attacked TAIWAN although they detest that thorn in their side if TAIWAN attempts to challenge the authority of China. War is a human system of organised slaughter....but without modern war machines one becomes an open-door to aggressors. America has tried and failed to deploy convential power in Iraq and Afghanistan....its failed.
China is a great nation....make way for the dragon.

NATO, as its name suggests, has its main power in Article 5 - mutual protection in the Northern Atlanitc Area, therefore, NATO is completely useless in case in had to stop a Chinese aggression. In general, NATO is completely useless in stopping any agression - every major country in the Northern Atlantic Area except Russia is a NATO member and the Russians are not so insane to destroy their good trading relationships with EU for nothing. Therefore, abolish NATO and create an EU common defence (without USA) and a Pacific common defence (USA, Japan, South Korea, Australia etc.).

Correction to my earlier post a moment ago:
The correct sentence should be : "... If your writers can't match, let alone surpass, the wits, wisdom and nuanced understanding of your own readers, on the very issues you report..."